Sporting News' Hall of Fame college basketball writer, super saddened by the passing of the Professor from "Gilligan's Island," answers five questions burning in his sport.

1. Arizona vs. Syracuse, neutral court. Who wins and why?

DeCourcy: The toughest part of that question is never knowing how a player will react to facing a capable zone defense, and Syracuse’s is much more than capable.

If it were just two teams playing man defense, Arizona has better players by a razor-thin margin. If we were doing a draft of the two teams based on how they’ve played this year, say, two of my first three picks—and three of the first five—would be Wildcats. (Nick Johnson, C.J. Fair, Aaron Gordon, Tyler Ennis, T.J McConnell).

But that’s now how it works. They’ve gotta play. The fact that Arizona’s guards are not big and that their 3-point shooting is not lethal could be an issue. Certainly lack of size out front hindered Ohio State in facing zones set by Iowa and Minnesota, and we all remember what happened to Indiana in two encounters with the SU zone.

However, Pitt has won 10 of 14 games against Syracuse under Jamie Dixon, and a lot of those were earned without great perimeter shooters or tall guards. Maybe even most. The Panthers have taken a patient approach to breaking the SU zone from the inside out, and they don’t get rattled. That would seem to be the sort of team Arizona is, based on its comeback effort at Michigan, for instance, which preserved the unbeaten record.

Ennis, Syracuse’s freshman point guard, has been spectacular directing the team’s winning streak. He is an excellent scorer but doesn’t force that aspect of his game, which is a problem for a lot of “scoring points” in the current atmosphere.

Where SU might lack is its ability to generate enough offense against a defense as oppressive as Arizona’s, which could use Gordon as a lockdown defender against Fair and Johnson to keep shooter Trevor Cooney from finding open looks.

That’s why I’d lean toward Arizona. But, man, would I love to see this game.

DeCourcy: Suggesting a coach of the year at midseason can be so hazardous, because conference play is what truly reveals where a team is headed. Being forced onto the road, against like opponents, is the truest test of a college basketball team. The NCAA Tournament means more, but a coach who does extraordinary work in league play has shown he can be consistently resilient, inventive, unyielding.

To this point, there are several coaches whose work would suggest he belongs in this discussion, but generally by the first or second week in March we have a much clearer picture.

Jim Boeheim, Syracuse, and Sean Miller, Arizona. Their teams were predicted to finish among the top 10 in the country. That’s where each resides, although several spots ahead of what was anticipated. Each coach made minor adjustments to his proven formula, and each successfully incorporated a talented freshman. And neither has lost.

Bo Ryan, Wisconsin. He’s so perpetually good it’s almost boring to include him, but his out-of-character move of wing Sam Dekker to power forward energized the Badgers as they’ve never been before.

Jay Wright, Villanova. Raise your hand if you thought this was a top-10 team? No hands? Right, what we thought.

Gregg Marshall, Wichita State. Perfect is perfect.

My choice for now, though, would be Steve Fisher of San Diego State. There are other one-loss teams, including Wisconsin and Villanova. But none has gained a victory as uncommon as the Aztecs’ triumph at Kansas Allen Fieldhouse.

But Fisher faced the exceptional challenge in the offseason of an assistant coach being diagnosed with ALS—and that staffer is his son, Mark.

Fisher has elegantly persevered and continued to excel. The Aztecs’ only loss was to No. 1 Arizona. They’ve beaten Creighton and Washington and opened 4-0 in the Mountain West. It’s a long way from here to season’s end, but there’s little doubt Fisher will navigate it gracefully.

3. Kansas wants to keep up with the Kentuckys of the world and build a new apartment complex to house its hoops athletes. Are we headed for a time when schools promise recruits purified air at monster truck rallies?

DeCourcy: Don’t be ridiculous. How many high school hoop stars you think you’re going to catch at a monster truck rally?

4. After nearly beating Wisconsin in Madison and then beating Ohio State in Columbus, how much do you like the Hawkeyes?

DeCourcy: Maybe a little more than I liked them at the start of the year, when we ranked Iowa No. 22 in preseason. That would be equivalent to a No. 6 seed in the NCAA Tournament, and it would appear they’re positioned to be a few spots better than that.

My colleague at BTN, analyst Tim Doyle, insists Iowa can be a Final Four team. I would not dispute that, but the real issue is whether the Hawkeyes should be a Final Four team, or have a great chance at it. Most high-quality teams have a shot at a Final Four if they play with great confidence and quality and get a fortunate bounce or two. George Mason, VCU and Wichita State showed you don’t even need a great draw; all three had to beat No. 1 seeds to get there.

Iowa has probably the toughest league schedule in the Big Ten. The Hawkeyes still must play at Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota and Michigan State. That’s a heck of a road. As well, they’ve got Minnesota, Michigan State, Ohio State, Michigan, Wisconsin, Purdue and Illinois at Carver-Hawkeye.

They’re already done with Nebraska, and have one game each remaining against Northwestern and Penn State.

The Hawkeyes’ offense has been extremely productive and efficient, in part because they are so effective at forcing turnovers and converting those into transition baskets. The defense has worked, but will it work as well against an unrelenting diet of capable opponents?

I think it’ll be fine, but that 5 or 6 seed still feels about right.

5) Give me the mid-major that teams should watch out for. No choosing Gonzaga!

DeCourcy: Ha! You didn’t say no Wichita!

(Besides, Gonzaga is no longer a mid-major. They play in a mid-major league, but no mid-major gets this sort of schedule, travel, exposure or recruiting. It’s OK. It’s a common mistake).

It’d be boring, though, to choose the Shockers. So let’s look at Harvard. The Crimson lost by only five at UConn, and by eight at Colorado. That might be reason enough to believe. They’ve built a 14-2 record even though they’ve only had their full rotation available for about seven games. The one thing that’s worrisome in suggesting this as a potential “upset” team in March is that Harvard does not rely heavily on 3-point shooting; only 79 of 403 made field goals was a 3-pointer. So often it’s hot shooting that makes a difference in a tournament upset. (Speaking of Gonzaga and Wichita, ask the Zags about their experience against the Shockers last March).

A year ago, however, a less talented and deep Harvard team defeated No. 3 seed New Mexico in the NCAA Tournament, so these guys know they can win there. It’d be tough for the Crimson to win more than one, but that one could be memorable.